PlayStation 5, Xbox Two may arrive sooner than you think

[Emexrulsier]

No 4K please, make 60fps 1080p first. Promised since ps3 and xbox 360 and still waiting.

I was about to say similar in regards to 1080 and low frame rates. I have been playing both FH4 and GH Live (PS4) and both have issues at times with frame rates dropping sub 20 and I am sure even on spikes as low as 5-10fps is ridiculous. I reckon they won't bring out a new generation of consoles as such but more a slightly beefier PS4 maybe a PS4+ that support 4K @ 30 and then maybe that could handle 1080 @ 60. It's why I still own a high end PC (im rolling a 980ti) because I know it can run circles around my consoles, the console is just good because it "just works" (90% of the time)

 

[Unearthed]

"I've grown attached to Steam. New PC? Just download my Steam games again, no extra box."

I don't even know why consoles still exist these days. The PC does everything a console can do and more.

 

[adisoftcafe]

PC+TV+Xbox gamepad+Steam = best console.

 

[yukka]

Bring it on. I like the Xbox ecosystem but I want more power. Give me the Xbox Two already

 

[adisoftcafe]

Console with replaceable parts? It is called gaming PC! )

 

[3volv3d]

This is exactly why I don't jump on new tech. It is always shrouded in mistakes, albeit manufacturing or marketing. It either doesn't work properly and needs a new revised model. Or they pull this crap and decide, oh we jumped the gun.

Outdated already? : Well aren't consoles always behind PC. Everytime I decide it's safe enough to buy one iteration of components, someone decides to release a new improved version of something within a month or two, and I think why didn't I just wait. Early adopters of Skylake PC's I hope will be all kicking themselves when the USB-C comes out, for a truly universal USB cable which, doesn't fit their boards.

As we see in above comments, PC people claiming that PC's are superior, the tech is always changing and consoles can't keep up. And neither it seems can programmers of games. It feels like your point is Moot. With new tech coming out all the time, which in itself is buggy, games would be super buggy, stuff would never work. Surely consoles and mid range PC's are where their market is ?

I do agree that consoles suck. I hate Sony and M$'s marketing and planning of these things, if they want to survive they need to adapt. They need backwards compatibility and stop milking old games for cash when people already have them, its shady. They need to stop selling games at RRP on their stores. Seriously how is that a good strategy, when you can buy physical copies that cost money to ship all around the world when you can just upload to a customer in an hour over the information highway. You money grabbing SOB's. Seriously p*ss*s me off that does. People with logic like that should be shot in the face and fed to the fishes.

When it comes down to it, it looks like p*ss poor planning from the likes of Sony and M$, but its all about money. Things aren't made to last anymore, they just churn quantity over quality now. A conveyor belt of mass market crap. Humans consume faster than ever to keep distracted, 2 minutes going without checking facebook, and they start to ponder the universe and how life is BS, that they are a slave to consumerism. But luckily that pop up ad draws those people back to the screens long enough to distract them from their thoughts... what were you thinking about before ?.... Buy the PS5 or the Xbox Two ?

 

[Gopal Bhat]

Refreshed console lineup with spec boosts targeted towards hardcore gamers like those that bought the elite controller. Test the waters maybe?

PS4X and Xbox One Z

 

[oldikes]

"I've grown attached to Steam. New PC? Just download my Steam games again, no extra box."

I don't even know why consoles still exist these days. The PC does everything a console can do and more.

not for 300 dollars it doesnt.

 

[gamerk2]

The only problem with this is that the games were programmed to take advantage of very specific hardware. Unless AMD uses the exact same hardware, some level of emulation is going to be required.

In the end, it's an x86 APU. As long as it is the same, which it is, just a stronger, more capable chip with likely the same instruction set, hence using the same thing instead of changing the whole game (Nvidia, Intel, etc.), then no, emulation won't be necessary. Now if they change over to something else, possibly.

Not exactly. The advantage of having a single HW spec is you can go right in and manually assign register usage if you need to. Even as late as the Wii, this is still done in some cases to get every last ounce of performance out of the machines. This relies on EXACT bus level timings, and even offering a slightly faster version of the same exact chips could break processing. So even backward compatibility won't be 100%.

Really, your basically at the point where consoles are non-upgradable PCs now.

 

[Adhmuz]

It's really too bad the PS4 and XB1 are so underwhelming in features gamers want (ie games), and instead are packed full of crap you can get in a $50 generic smart device. Oh and the catastrophic lack of rendering power doesn't help either...

The idea of an upgradable GPU isn't absurd either, expansion ports were common place back in the day, when the console manufacturers had guts, sadly most of these never ended up being exploited, but it's the fact that they had some foresight and included them. For the PS4 it would make fantastic marketing, albeit a tad confusing at first.

Now try to follow, sell two consoles, both support the same games. The first console, the PS4 as it is now, remains unaltered and gets a $100 discount and an expansion port. The second, now this is the clever bit, call it the PS4K, see what I did there? and sell it as an upgraded GPU model capable of 4K, sell it $100 more than current pricing. This creates a two tier system at two distinct price points, allowing people to choose a console to suit their display. Even make the first tier upgradable via expansion port by selling the upgraded GPU separately for, I don't know, $200.

This is assuming developers are going to be willing to make their games with two sets of textures and incorporate them onto a single disc, heck even sell the games in a two disc pack, PS4 and PS4K in one box. I know that's a fantasy but hey, not a terrible idea?

 

[Darren delaMare]

Oh! Companies are still selling Consoles? I had almost forgotten they still exist.

I gave my brother a 5 year old laptop with a 1080p screen and an AMD 5670m GPU and he was blown away by how good it looked compared to the Xbox 360! lol He's playing FO4 on it right now with higher resolution and FPS than the xbox one, albeit its very close...

Technology for kids in my opinion.

 

[Massiosare]

5x more power per watt? I think we'll be in the Zen CPU territory with HBM2.0 memory and a next gen GPU.
and the article states that premium consoles have a 7 year lifespan. that is false. besides last gen consoles which lasted 7-8 years, they generally had a 4-5 year lifespan (with only the PS2 having 6 years because the ps3 launched a year late).

I´m 100% agree; PS4/XBO-2 > Zen or better AMD architecture + Next Gen GPUs + HBM2.0 Vram (DDR4 just in case for XBO-2 xD).

The 7-8 year lifespan that we see in PS3/360 Gen It is not the norm in the industry...5-6 years is a period of time more grounded (PS1 launch in Japan 1994, PS2 at 2000 year, PS4 in 2006, PS4 in 2013...PS5 > 2018..... 2019 if the PS´s money machine stays healthy, buy ey! Summer Olympic Games 2020 will be in Japan, What if the PS5 appears at this time? (during the spring or summer 2020).

 

[Massiosare]

5x more power per watt? I think we'll be in the Zen CPU territory with HBM2.0 memory and a next gen GPU.
and the article states that premium consoles have a 7 year lifespan. that is false. besides last gen consoles which lasted 7-8 years, they generally had a 4-5 year lifespan (with only the PS2 having 6 years because the ps3 launched a year late).

I´m 100% agree; PS4/XBO-2 > Zen or better AMD architecture + Next Gen GPUs + HBM2.0 Vram (DDR4 just in case for XBO-2 xD).

The 7-8 year lifespan that we see in PS3/360 Gen It is not the norm in the industry...5-6 years is a period of time more grounded (PS1 launch in Japan 1994, PS2 at 2000 year, PS4 in 2006, PS4 in 2013...PS5 > 2018..... 2019 if the PS´s money machine stays healthy, buy ey! Summer Olympic Games 2020 will be in Japan, What if the PS5 appears at this time? (during the spring or summer 2020).

* PS5. xD

 

[GraemeWilly]

I remember an article around Xbox One launch, claiming that this generation of Microsoft console would be much shorter...namely, due, to faster growing technology and Microsoft's other markets, such as tablets and cell phones, all of which receive regular hardware updates and that they would have to maintain a similar cycle reset as their other hardware. Makes sense. There's already gaming tablets that can run Crysis 3. What's the PS5 and Xbox One going to be in another two years when mobile technology has surpassed them? LoL

 

[cldmstrsn]

Noe that they have gone x86 they cant go back and they will see you easy it will be to have Backwards Compatibility and even have emulation for PS1/2/3.

 

[Nero7]

Because the only way console games perform as well as they do is because developers are making it for a single set of hardware. Adding another chip to the mix complicates things and makes it harder to make the game as efficient as possible. Might as well just move to a PC at that point.

That wouldn't be a problem since the old games would be made to run with 1 GPU inside and then the new games would be made to run with 2 GPU inside. If you have 2 GPU and want to play an old game the second GPU could deactivate itself or it could be used to play the old games in a higher resolution with better anti aliasing or so.

It certainly wouldn't be impossible if it was made with that intention from the start.

Buying a new console every 4 years just because the GPU can't display the shiny new graphics anymore is ridiculous.

 

[Massiosare]

This sounds like nonsense , the current console's struggle to do 1080 , especially the xbox . There's no way they will be selling a console that can do 4k soon , absolutely no way they can sell at console prices for a machine that can do 4k.

@gingerbill

I think that PS4/XBO-2 definitely point to an intermediate resolution between FULL HD and UHD, meaning that PS5/XBO-2 handled the 2560x1440p resolution (almost 1.8 times compared 1080p), so it would scale the image up to 3840x2160p (better than do it from 1080p) and obviously also would be able to move the games to 1920x1080p/60fps and VR 1080p/60fps each eye.

PS4 has 1.84 TFLOPs, Samaritan Demo-Cinema (UE4 with SVOGI > amazing ilumination) need 2.5 TFLOPs (1920x1080p x 30fps x 40K operation per pixel) and some ppl say that Nextgen Consoles will have 5x perfomance/watt against PS4, that would give us a 9TFLOPs, but realistically I think that will be 8 TFLOPs ( somethin similar to an AMD R9 Nano with 4GB HMB 1.0, but with HMB 2.0).
http://I.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--kBhsnqUB--/18j0rl4losigjpng.png

http://techreport.com/r.x/2015_8_26_Radeon_R9_Nano_to_pack_a_wallop_at_649/specs.jpg


* OPP = Operation per pixel, so:

- Best looking PS4 Games (30fps) > 1600x900p x 30fps x 40K opp = 1.7 TLOPs
Most PS4 games > 1920x1080p x 30fps x 30K opp = 1.8 TLOPs

- PS5 FHD/30 > 1920x1080p x 30fps x 120K opp = 7.5 TFLOPs
- PS5 FHD/60 > 1920x1080p x 60fps x 60K opp = 7.5 TFLOPs
- PS5 VR FHD > 1920x1080p x 60fps (each eye) x 30K opp = 3.7 TFLOPs x2.

- PS5 1440p > 2560x1440p x 60fps x 40K opp = 8.8 TFLOPs
> 2560x1440p x 30 fps x 80K opp = 8.8 TFLOPs
> VR 1440p > 2560x1440p x 60fps (each eye) x 20K opp = 4.4 TFLOPs x 2.

- PS5 UHD > 3840x2160p x 30fps x 30K opp = 7.5 TFlops (40K opp = 10 TFLOPs)
> 3840x2160p x 60fps x 30K opp = 15 TFLOPs 40K opp = 20 TFLOPs)

So I think a PS5 for 2560x1440p resolution, it would be more realistic and consistent with the 5x improvement of performance per watt that certain people has spoken.

 

[daveincarthage]

"I've grown attached to Steam. New PC? Just download my Steam games again, no extra box."

I don't even know why consoles still exist these days. The PC does everything a console can do and more.

The PC may be capable but the advantage of using a console (for me) is I don't have to worry about things being compatible or not. Buy a console game and you know it's going to work out of the box.

 

[sauerkraut17]

I wouldn't mind shorter console life-cycles. Everyone always says the average consumer won't be willing to upgrade every 2-4 years. Excuse me while I point out the elephant in the room...

Smart Phones

Your average consumer has almost no issue with buying the newest iPhone or Android every 1-2 years and those flagship devices have higher price tags then consoles.

 

[anubis44]

Oh good grief. The vast majority of PCs cant do 4k- we arent going to get a console that can do 4k 60 fps at any time in the next 5 years.

AMD can make a dual Greenland GPU Radeon-based APU using the 16nm Taiwan Semiconductor process or 14nm Global Foundaries process with Zen-based CPU cores that will run 4K games at 60FPS in 2016. Something like this is the probable replacement for the current generation consoles.

 

[Lionvibez]

What I don't understand is why consoles don't go for a technology like SLI/Crossfire. They could after 4 years sell a second GPU and you'd attach it and then get that way much more performance for at least another 2 years.

Because the only way console games perform as well as they do is because developers are making it for a single set of hardware. Adding another chip to the mix complicates things and makes it harder to make the game as efficient as possible. Might as well just move to a PC at that point.

Also how are you going to get rid of the heat a SLI/Xfire setup will cause in that small box that is a console.

You will melt the box!

Powerful desktop GPU's require space to be cooled, upgradable consoles they will never do they would prefer you buy a new one in 5 years.

 

[Nero7]

Also how are you going to get rid of the heat a SLI/Xfire setup will cause in that small box that is a console.

You will melt the box!

Powerful desktop GPU's require space to be cooled, upgradable consoles they will never do they would prefer you buy a new one in 5 years.

Why are you only capable of imagining problems? if the console was from the start made with a dual GPU setup in mind this problem would not exist. Perhaps it would be a 30 - 50% bigger box. Who cares? Nowhere do I say that they should take the PS3 and somehow magically cram a second GPU into it.

I highly doubt that they prefer making a new console every 5 years. The cost is enormous. The PS3 and Xbox360 had a hard time due to the change over from DVD to blu-ray. But now that we have blu-ray and online well established there's barely any need for any new hardware whatsoever except for a stronger GPU and perhaps RAM.

I don't mean that the console would be made to fit every desktop GPU. Just a certain one. The GTX960 or 970 for example is a very capable GPU and if you later add a second one you get a very strong performance.

A very simple way to make games run with lower hardware would be to just lower some settings like anti alising. I've seen a lot of different anti alising techniques show up lately but in all honesty 8x CSAA does the trick and if you want more then go for a real gaming desktop with a 980 inside.

If all you wanna do is imagine problems then I have no interest into discussing this further with you. These problems can certainly be solved. Next you'll tell me that it would need a bigger PSU? So what? Then put a bigger one inside or let the second GPU power itself.

 

[Squid Surprise]

Even a PC with a Titan X can't do 4k gaming at ultra details @ 60fps.... And I don't see any consoles packing dual (or more) of those (or dual or more Fury cards)...

Gonna be awhile until hardware matches those capabilities for mainstream consumers - which is what consoles are for...

And "typical lifespan of a console"??!?!?! First of all, there are only like half a dozen "generations" of consoles in the first place, and which one(s) lasted 7 years?!?!?! I'd like to see some sort of citation from someone who can prove this...

Here's Nintendo's North American releases... none of which are 7 years apart I might add...
NES - 1985
SNES - 1991
N64 - 1996
Gamecube - 2001
Wii - 2006
Wii U - 2012

 

[Lionvibez]

Why are you only capable of imagining problems? if the console was from the start made with a dual GPU setup in mind this problem would not exist. Perhaps it would be a 30 - 50% bigger box. Who cares? Nowhere do I say that they should take the PS3 and somehow magically cram a second GPU into it.

I highly doubt that they prefer making a new console every 5 years. The cost is enormous. The PS3 and Xbox360 had a hard time due to the change over from DVD to blu-ray. But now that we have blu-ray and online well established there's barely any need for any new hardware whatsoever except for a stronger GPU and perhaps RAM.

I don't mean that the console would be made to fit every desktop GPU. Just a certain one. The GTX960 or 970 for example is a very capable GPU and if you later add a second one you get a very strong performance.

A very simple way to make games run with lower hardware would be to just lower some settings like anti alising. I've seen a lot of different anti alising techniques show up lately but in all honesty 8x CSAA does the trick and if you want more then go for a real gaming desktop with a 980 inside.

If all you wanna do is imagine problems then I have no interest into discussing this further with you. These problems can certainly be solved. Next you'll tell me that it would need a bigger PSU? So what? Then put a bigger one inside or let the second GPU power itself.

Its not just imaging the problems its living in the real world with psychics, it doesn't make sense to create more points of failure in the machine. SLI and Xfire require profiles for each games to gain optimal performance that will just add extra work for developers which is opposite of what they want might as well just stick to PC games.

Your point doesn't require further debate as its a fantasy.

The issue will be resolved when we have gpu's that are fast enough and small enough for 4k and we will see those on PC before the consoles see them.

And even if the next consoles hit that mark I believe it will still be 4k at 30fps just like the current consoles do 1080p at 30fps.

 

[treetops]

Even a PC with a Titan X can't do 4k gaming at ultra details @ 60fps.... And I don't see any consoles packing dual (or more) of those (or dual or more Fury cards)...

Gonna be awhile until hardware matches those capabilities for mainstream consumers - which is what consoles are for...

And "typical lifespan of a console"??!?!?! First of all, there are only like half a dozen "generations" of consoles in the first place, and which one(s) lasted 7 years?!?!?! I'd like to see some sort of citation from someone who can prove this...

Here's Nintendo's North American releases... none of which are 7 years apart I might add...
NES - 1985
SNES - 1991
N64 - 1996
Gamecube - 2001
Wii - 2006
Wii U - 2012

True but xbox 360 2005, xbox one 2013. Which is a retarded long span. Nintendo should be the staple.